It was interesting to me to learn about the article by Paul Farhi in the American Journalism Review called “Flunking the Test“, which blows apart typical reporting on education as essentially taking so-called “reformers” views at face value.
Mr. Farhi points out that not only is the idea of an “crisis in education” false, (recalling arguments advanced at the implementation of the current public school system and the end of the common school system that had previously existed), but that in fact, American schools are doing better than ever on most relevant statistics. Mr. Farhi puts it best:
Some schools are having a difficult time educating children – particularly children who are impoverished, speak a language other than English, move frequently or arrive at the school door neglected, abused or chronically ill. But many pieces of this complex mosaic are quite positive. First data point: American elementary and middle school students have improved their performance on the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study every four years since the tests began in 1995; they are above the international average in all categories and within a few percentage points of the global leaders (something that few news reports mention). Second data point: The number of Americans with at least some college education has soared over the past 70 years, from 10 percent in 1940 to 56 percent today, even as the population has tripled and the nation has grown vastly more diverse. All told, America’s long-term achievements in education are nothing short of stunning.
Are there troubles? Of course. But the reality is that in large part, our schools are not failing. The virtual destruction of the existing American education system (required if 100% proficiency in reading comprehension and mathematics are not met by a school by 2014, a fact which remains as long as No Child Left Behind stays in place), would essentially throw out the very policies that have made American education so successful.
Critics will point out that there are schools that are doing poorly. This is true, but as Mr. Farhi points out, these are mostly in areas where there are high rates of poverty and low rates of English. School vouchers, eliminating bad teachers by replacing them with Teach For America’s untrained novices (it takes roughly two years for a teacher to get into the swing of things, but TFA’s program lasts exactly two years), charter schools; all of these reforms fail to take aim at the structural problem here: poverty limits how well our children learn.
Now, Mr. Farhi makes clear that schools are often their own worst enemies here: many school systems prevent reporters from talking to teachers or students or viewing how classes work. As a result, reporters rely on sources like advocates, administrators, labor leaders, etc., for their sources. We’re not learning directly how things work from the sources in the trenches, something which empowers the message of education reformers while weakening the message of educators.
In Rhode Island, we can see the trouble here. The pattern of well-off triumphing over poor-off holds true, even according to charter school advocacy group RI-CAN’s report cards. Virtually all of the “best” schools are from well-off schools districts; Barrington, East Greenwich, Little Compton, etc. All of the “worst” are from Providence and Central Falls, metropolitan areas with high levels of poverty and large numbers of Spanish-speaking residents. The sole exception is Classical High School (my alma mater), which attracts students from well-off areas in Providence and the best students from impoverished areas of the capital city (or at least those who can pass the test).
Mr. Farhi points out that nearly 37% of Americans say their own children’s schools are deserving of an “A”. Looking to other schools, the numbers drop precipitously, only 1% of Americans would rate the nation’s school system that way. So, essentially, we’re happy with own schools (though they might need slight improvement), but disappointed with everyone else’s schools. Either Americans are collectively deluded as to the state of their own schools (a possibility not borne out by data showing improvement), or else media coverage has failed to properly scrutinize the overblown “crisis” in American schools that’s been advanced by well-off elites in America (many of whom never attended public schools).
In this age of austerity, it is unlikely we will provide the actual solution necessary to educational success in all our schools: fighting poverty. Instead, as poverty increases the gap between rich and poor schools will grow worse. Few schools are equipped to handle this problem. Some charter schools are, but only rarely. The wholesale charterization of the American school system is not only poorly thought out, it’s against the thinking that created the idea of the charter school: that they would act as education laboratories where public schools could not. Pathfinders for new ways of teaching.
A noble goal which has been perverted. Our choice is stark. Either we face the trouble that this country is well aware of, economic inequality that is spiraling out of control; or alternatively we can lose everything that has made this country the beacon of world achievement.
Of course the Drive By Reformers will have a stock set of replies to Sam’s well done article:
1. You are defending the status quo
2. You are defending adult entitlements
3. You are not interested in changing an obviously broken system
4. You don’t care about poor minority children because if you did you would recognize (insert talking point of the say here)
Here’s the thing, the ed reform crowd are the same people ( or same types of people, from the same schools of thought, just a generation removed) who told us that Free Trade would be good for US manufacturing so pass NAFTA and GATT .
How did that work out for us?
[This comment has been removed for not adhering to RI Future's rules for comments. www.rifuture.org//about
RTW,
You are more than welcome to comment on stories, and we appreciate all the time you invest in our work, but please follow our rules for comments, which include: “Do not resort to personal attacks or unconstructive, disruptive behavior.”
www.rifuture.org//about
Bob Plain
Bob – Pat Crowley is a public figure in Rhode Island. He is a very vocal and controversial representative of what is arguably the state’s most powerful public labor union, which represents public school teachers and is relevant to the topic of public education. There are substantive, politically-related reasons why I accused him of hypocrisy, not the least of which is that he regularly and publicly engages in exactly the same kind of political, propagandist behavior he mentioned in this thread. I have seen public figures accused of hypocrisy on this blog many times by contributors, including your own blog articles. Are those all “personal attacks” as well? Why is that allowed but my post was not?
Also, since you apparently haven’t noticed, commenter “Turbo” has been making a campaign of particularly nasty personal attacks against me and other “right wing” commenters for the past two months, and he has deliberately derailed multiple threads through anti-free market trolling about off-topic irrelevancies like “buy gold,” “9-11 truthers,” and “Glenn Beck.” The other day he accused me of fabricating my law license – is that “constructive” commenting? Is he allowed to regularly engage in that behavior because he does it from a progressive standpoint?
RTW,
If you want to submit a piece on why a public official is a hypocrite, and can back up that assertion, we’ll consider running that. But you simply calling someone a hypocrite, with no reasoning at all, adds little to the marketplace of ideas AND dissuades people from participating.
Please attack the idea rather than the person.
Bob Plain
It’s your blog and you can moderate it however you wish, but it was clear from the context of my reply that I was accusing Pat of hypocrisy with regard to the political tactics that he mentioned in his comment. I suppose that Turbo continues to get a free pass to harass libertarian and conservative commenters and troll this site as he pleases then. In any case, it was not my intention to violate the rules. I thought my comment was permissible based on precedent.
Honestly though, some level of consistency in regards to comment moderation would be appreciated… trolling and nonsensical posts are what lead to the fall of the last iteration of RIF. I’d hate to see that happen again.
“…blows apart typical reporting on education as essentially taking so-called ‘reformers’ views at face value.”
Good point but then immediately you and Farhi do just that.
“American elementary and middle school students have improved their performance on the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study every four years since the tests began in 1995.”
What evidence is there that improved performance on standardized testing reflects improvement in the quality of education? You’re taking the corporate view at face value, and that’s despite the volumes of evidence that high-stakes testing has exactly the opposite effect on the quality of education.
Maybe we need to take a look at the LaSalle, Hendricken, Moses Brown, etc. educational models. They seem to working quite well.
I agree. What you won’t find is high-stakes testing on steriods or glorified test prep. Oddly that seems not to matter to the “accountability” crowd, who’d rather have one neck to choke than actual improvement.